Molecular identification of sympatric chromosomal forms of Anopheles gambiae and further evidence of their reproductive isolation

Three chromosomal forms of Anopheles gambiae s.s., designated as Bamako, Mopti and Savanna, were studied for diagnostic PCR assays based on the analysis of the X‐linked ribosomal DNA (rDNA). The study was performed on a 1.3 kb fragment containing part of the 28S coding region and part of the interge...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInsect molecular biology Vol. 6; no. 4; pp. 377 - 383
Main Authors Favia, G, della Torre, A, Bagayoko, M, Lanfrancotti, A, Sagnon, N'F, Touré, Y. T, Coluzzi, M
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Science Ltd 01.11.1997
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Three chromosomal forms of Anopheles gambiae s.s., designated as Bamako, Mopti and Savanna, were studied for diagnostic PCR assays based on the analysis of the X‐linked ribosomal DNA (rDNA). The study was performed on a 1.3 kb fragment containing part of the 28S coding region and part of the intergenic spacer region. The amplified material was cut with fourteen restriction enzymes to detect Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLPs). The enzymes Tru9I and HhaI produced patterns of DNA bands which differentiated Mopti from Savanna and Bamako; moreover, a distinct ‘hybrid’ pattern was recognized in the F1 female progeny from the cross of Mopti with either one of the other two chromosomal forms. The diagnostic significance of the PCR‐RFLP assay was verified on 203 karyotyped females from field samples collected in two villages in Mali and one village in Burkina Faso. Agreement was observed between the chromosomal and the molecular identifications. No ‘hybrid’ molecular patterns were detected even among carriers of rare heterokaryotypes hypothetically produced by crosses between Mopti and Savanna. The results confirm previous observations indicating barriers to gene flow within An. gambiae s.s. and supporting the specific status of the taxonomic units proposed on cytogenetic ground.
Bibliography:http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2583.1997.00189.x
istex:F5444FEECCA4E49B16B830A1A610613397CCD78E
ark:/67375/WNG-QCQZPXQZ-3
ArticleID:IMB189
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0962-1075
1365-2583
DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2583.1997.00189.x